db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Philip Wilder <0505...@acadiau.ca>
Subject Re: JDBC auto-commit semantics challenge
Date Mon, 27 Jun 2005 12:21:13 GMT
Lance, It would appear that the setAutoCommit javadoc for JDBC 4.0 and 
the javadoc used for J2SE 1.4.2 (I assume JDBC 3.0) are identical so I'm 
afraid they can shed no light on the subject.

Dan, the footnotes were removed as they do not translate particularly 
well to a plain text format. I do apologize for zapping the footnote 
regarding your the difference between the JDBC spec and the javadocs. 
That should have stayed.

For anyone just tuning into this email thread the comment went something 
like this:

"[The advanced case] definition complies with the JDK 1.4.1 
interpretation of the JDBC implementation which differs from the JDBC 
3.0 specifications. Thanks to Daniel Debrunner for pointing this out."

Philip Wilder

Lance Anderson wrote:

 > i have not had the bandwidth to follow this thread due to J1 and a 
few other fire drills.  We have > made changes to the spec and javadocs 
in JDBC 4 to clarify things in these areas.  Please take a > look and 
see if there is still something you feel needs clarified.

Kathey Marsden wrote:

>Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I think you dropped the footnotes that you had in the pdf document.
>>The note that talked about JDBC 3.0 spec did not mention output
>>parameters for auto commit on callable statements.
>>
>>I would challenge that the text from JDBC 3.0 spec, section 10.1 is the
>>definitive behaviour, not the javadoc of setAutoCommit.
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>So  does that make that a bug in the setAutoCommit javadoc?  Lance do
>you have an opinon here?
>
>
>
>  
>

Mime
View raw message